Mediaboss Marketing

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The New York Times on Aug. 24, 2014, broke a major news story: Obama pushing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty. Its a clumsy headline no one dared claim the Kyoto Protocol was anything other than a treaty requiring Senate ratification, and even the Grey Lady calls it the Kyoto Accord. What the story revealed, however, was shocking news indeed, made more shocking by an email just revealed by the State Department in Freedom of Information Act litigation.

This email, obtained by the Energy and Environment Legal Institute, further calls into question the Senates failure to confront President Obama over his usurpation of the bodys constitutional treaty function through the Paris climate agreement.

It also stokes concerns whether the institution will reclaim its powers, as appears will be necessary in order to make good on President Trumps announced plan to withdraw from Paris.

The Times storys key passage:

In seeking to go around Congress to push his international climate change agenda, Mr. Obama is echoing his domestic climate strategy. In June, he bypassed Congress and used his executive authority to order a far-reaching regulation forcing American coal-fired power plants to curb their carbon emissions. The Obama administrations international climate strategy is likely to infuriate Republican lawmakers who already say the president is abusing his executive authority by pushing through major policies without congressional approval.

Mr. Obama jammed those EPA rules through by executive fiat, after a Democrat-led Congress killed legislation to grant the authority he then claimed to already possess; the Supreme Court put the rules on ice upon challenge by a majority of states. The Paris climate agreement, however, unilaterally imposed on Mr. Obamas way out the door, would be a treaty that was going to last until the end of the century.

Thats according to a senior Obama administration official.

Of course, under our Constitutions Article II, Section 2, no president can commit the U.S. to treaties without Senate advice and consent.

On the morning the Times story broke outing Mr. Obamas Paris end-run around our Constitution, State Department public affairs aide Alexandra Costello wrote to Andy Olson, a lawyer for the senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Bob Corker, insisting the story contained some inaccuracies/assumptions that we pushed back on without success.

Mr. Olson wrote back, I certainly hope it is inaccurate because some of the things alleged indicate a disturbing contempt for the Senates constitutional rights and responsibilities. We will need to be fully briefed when staff are back next week. Strong stuff, and true.

These inaccuracies State then ironed out with the Senate are a mystery, given that the Times story accurately detailed what proved to be Mr. Obamas plan. Yet the Senate rather shamefully made no move to arrest this contemptuous usurpation.

Paris is the successor to the Kyoto pact that died in the Senate. Such treaties are nonstarters under the United States democratic process; Paris even more so.

Kyoto committed to a five-year plan; the Paris treaty promises a new, tighter commitment every five years, forever. It is a treaty by its terms, custom and practice over two-plus centuries of shared assumptions.

Brazenly, Team Obama advanced a historic pretense of declaring what even they hailed as the most ambitious climate change agreement in history somehow not a treaty, betting the Senate would not speak up. They bet right.

Though Paris reach into perpetuity was not known at the time this Times story broke, the seizure of power that it revealed made it big news, shocking Senate lawyers. The lack of Senate intervention to this day remains scandalous. As the disastrous Iran deal showed, the institution has so atrophied it can no longer muster the will to protect its constitutionally delegated prerogatives.

On June 1, President Trump announced he would withdraw the United States from the Paris treaty, but through a process requiring him to wait more than two more years to send written notice. This would take effect one year after that, by chance the day after the 2020 re-election. As a purely executive move, Mr. Trumps successor can restore Mr. Obamas treaty with a pen and a phone. Unless the Senate weighs in.

Over the week following the Times story, this same heavily redacted email thread shows State officials exchanging emails over having been caught so far in advance of their intended coup. They were rightly worried, yet in the end, the Senate did nothing.

These written discussions surely would inform the public and the Senate about the latters proper response going forward, possibly taking the illicit Paris climate pact up as the treaty it plainly is.

As Mr. Trumps promise faces coming tests, we all deserve to see and consider Team Obamas discussion about having been caught in their unconstitutional climate gambit.

Christopher C. Horner is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Follow this link:
Obama's Paris climate scheme revelation - Washington Times

The Labor Department will make the first step Wednesday to formally roll back one of President Obama's key workplace law legacies, a vast expansion of the number of workers covered by federal overtime rules.

Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta has said the previous administration went too far in expanding the rule and exceeded its authority under the law.

"The department is aware of stakeholder concerns that the standard salary level set in the 2016 final rule was too high. In particular, stakeholders have expressed the concern that the new salary level inappropriately excludes from exemption too many workers," the department said in a request for public comments regarding the rule set to be published Wednesday in the Federal Register. The request is required before the department can officially rescind the rule.

Federal law says employees must be paid time and a half once they work more than 40 hours in a week. However, businesses may exempt workers from the requirement if their duties are "managerial" in nature and they reach a certain salary threshold.

The Labor Department last year adjusted that threshold, previously $23,000 annually, to more than $47,000. The change was opposed by many Republican lawmakers and business groups, who argued that the change exceeded the department's authority. A Texas judge threw out the rule last year and the issue is still in court.

During his Senate confirmation hearing in March, Acosta indicated that he thought the rate should have been increased before last year but that raising it to $47,000 caused a "stress on the system." The question of where the rate should be was a "very difficult decision," he said. The rate was last raised in 2004 by President George W. Bush.

Acosta and other critics have argued that the higher rate would not necessarily help workers and was more likely to cause businesses to cut back on hours and reduce hiring rather than face higher labor costs. Tuesday's announcement seeks responses on whether "the standard salary level set in that rule effectively identifies employees who may be exempt, whether a different salary level would more appropriately identify such employees, the basis for setting a different salary level, and why a different salary level would be more appropriate or effective."

Business groups applauded the announcement. ""Retailers understand that overtime rules need to be updated occasionally but the extreme changes pushed by the Obama administration were too sharp an increase for most businesses to absorb without negative consequences for both employers and employees," said David French, senior vice president for government relations for the National Retail Federation.

See the original post:
Labor Department moves to formally roll back Obama overtime rule - Washington Examiner

President Trump took jabs at Republicansenators, "dishonest" reporters, his predecessor and his 2016 election rival in a rambling and surprisingly partisan speech before about 30,000 Boy Scouts and their troop leaders Monday evening in West Virginia.

In one aside during remarks to the National Scout Jamboree in Glen Jean, W.V., the president asked, "Who the hell wants to speak about politics when I'm in front ofthe Boy Scouts?" Yet he launched into an extendeda critique of Washington politics.

That included jibes atsenators in his own party -- including by name the home statesenator, Shelley Moore Capito -- who have balked at endingthe Affordable Care Act and replacing it with a still uncertain plan that would cut hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicaid.

"I go to Washington and I see all these politicians, and I see the swamp. In fact it's not a good place --we should change it from the swamp to the cesspool or perhaps use the word sewer," he said.

Trump introduced several of his Cabinet members who had been Boy Scouts, including Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, there in Scout uniform; Energy Secretary Rick Perry' and Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price.

Price, the president said, "is going to start our path toward killing this horrible thing known as Obamacarethat's really hurting us."

"You going to get the votes?" Trump asked Price. "He better get them," Trump told the enthusiastic youths. "Otherwise, I'm going to say, 'Tom, you're fired!'"

He added,"You'd better get Sen. Capito to vote for it."

The Trump administration and Republican Senateleaders are pressing party colleagues to vote on Tuesday to allow debate onthe House-passed healthcare measure so that they can then amend it with a different Senate version. They need at least 50 of the 52 Republican senators to considerthe bill, a hurdle made more difficult with Sen.John McCain(R-Ariz.) undergoing treatment for a brain tumor.

Trump praised the Scouts for their pledges tobetrustworthy and loyal, and encouraged them to "never quit" and to "do something you love." But repeatedly he went off script to make political points.

"We could use somemore loyalty, I could tell you that," Trump said of Republicans in Congress. Within the first minute he attacked the press -- "fake news" -- twice and came back to the subject of "these dishonest people" later.

Of his predecessor, Trumpinterjected, "By the way, did President Obama ever come to a jamboree? The answer's no." When he vowed to kill Obamacare, the crowd chanted, "USA! USA!"

Trump criticized Democratic election opponent Hillary Clinton and recalled at length the surprise of his victory on Nov. 8, boasting of how red he'd made the TV networks' maps of the states.

In one extendedtangent that surely confused many Scouts, Trump described a long-ago cocktail party conversation with pioneering real estate developer William Levitt.Levitt was "a very successful man," Trump told the Scouts, but sold his business and"lost his momentum." Although Levitt is considered the architect of postwar American suburbia, he was also known for ensuring that properties were sold only to whites and non-Jews.

Read the original here:
Trump slams GOP senators, 'dishonest' press, Obama and Clinton in a rambling speech to national Boy Scouts Jamboree - Los Angeles Times

The former first lady is in the Mile High City.

Michelle Obama is in Denver to speak at an event sponsored by the Womens Foundation of Colorado to celebrate its 30th anniversary Tuesday night at the Pepsi Center. More than 8,000 people had bought tickets as of Tuesday morning.

She has inspired many girls with her story and her fierce commitment to creating access to education for girls, WFCO President and CEO Lauren Casteel said in a statement. We are thrilled that she is joining us.

Casteel will be moderating the conversation with Obama. Eight local teenagers,members of the 2017 Girls Leadership Council, will introduce the former first lady.

Obamas popularity led the organization to open up more seats to the event starting at 5:30 p.m., and tickets were still available as of midday Tuesday.

Michelle and Barack Obama have both been on speaking tours following a post-presidency vacation. Michelle Obama has largely steered clear of politics, focusing instead on topics that she advocated for as first lady, including education for women and health and nutrition for schoolchildren.

She spoke at the American Institute of Architectures annual conference in April, The Partnership for a Healthier America summit in May and the Pennsylvania Conference for Women in October.

Read the original here:
Michelle Obama to speak before thousands Tuesday night at the Pepsi Center - The Denver Post

WASHINGTON While President Donald Trump has cut over 800 regulations during just his first six months in office, freeing up small businesses to grow and prosper, one California farmer is hoping that his administration will drop a costly lawsuit held over from the Obama years.

So he can pursue his livelihood, farming, without the shadow of a misapplied regulation.

John Duarte, a farmer and owner of Duarte Nursey, Inc., planted winter wheat in 2012 on land thathe owns in Tehema County, California. In February 2013, he received a cease-and-desist order from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, according to the Pacific Legal Foundation, which is representing the Duarte family in this case.

The cease-and-desist order was based on allegations that the Duartes, in plowing their own land, had violated the Clean Water Act, which is supposed to govern navigable waters in the U.S., according to the EPAs website.

See Charlie Daniels in his latest starting role, in Revelation: Dawn of Global Government, which explains how America, Christianity and liberty all are being destroyed by the Trojan horse of globalism.

Under the Obama administration, the government expanded this definition to include even soggy areas on agricultural land, which can be as small as pools of standing water that only appear in the wet seasons of the year in areas that are normally entirely dry. Farming practices in general are supposed to be exempt from the Clean Water Act.

John Duarte attributes this cease-and-desist order to a mistake made in the government office. In a July 16 statement posted on the Duarte Nursery Facebook page, Duarte said: Wheat plantings and the shallow tillage involved have never triggered regulation, nor required permitting prior to this case. The prosecution got started when a federal bureaucrat confused the shallow 4-6 inch tillage operation with 3-4 feet deep ripping for vineyard or orchard preparation.

This kind of mistake is forgivable, given that Duarte Nursery does sell trees and vines. However, when it was discovered that they were planting wheat instead of an orchard or vineyard, the government should have dropped the case and left the Duartes in peace, his lawyers said.

Instead, the bureaucrats doubled down.

The government denied the Duartes a hearing to establish the facts, prompting them to sue the government for taking away their Fifth Amendment right to due process.

And the feds responded to the familys lawsuit with one against the family, for destruction of wetlands.

If the Duartes lose the suits, they will be force to pay $2.8 million in direct penalties, plus another $20-$30 million in additional mitigation to a private third-party organization, and they will lose the right to use their own land, according to Duartes statement.

So far, all the legal action taken against the Duartes has been by Obama administration officials.

Since the government side of the suit is now owned by the Trump administration, there may be hope that the government will drop the suit and leave the Duartes in peace.

EPA Director Scott Pruit has indicated sympathy with the Duartes, and members of Congress have petitioned Attorney General Jeff Sessions to drop the case against the California farmers.

President Trump has already directed that the EPA review the rules concerning what constitutes navigable waters under the Clean Water Act, which could lead to the case against the Duartes being thrown out anyway.

The government has been arguing that the exemptions granted for farming and plowing only apply if soil is not moved. Duarte said in his statement that he and other farmers have yet to understand how plowing can be done without moving soil.

If this unprecedented prosecution succeeds, it threatens nearly every farm in the United States, Duarte warned.

As well as suing for due process under the Fifth Amendment, the Duartes are arguing that the amount of fines being levied against them for simply plowing a wheat field violates the Eighth Amendments protections against cruel and unusual punishment. In addition, after a federal attorney said they are suing us so we are suing them back, the Duartes are suing the government for attempting to stifle their First Amendment right to free speech.

In June 2016, a judge sided with the federal government against the Duartes, saying they had indeed violated the Clean Water Act by plowing their wheat field. They have appealed the judges decision to throw out the First Amendment retaliation case to the Ninth Circuit Court, and the case will begin there on Aug. 15.

See Charlie Daniels in his latest starting role, in Revelation: Dawn of Global Government, which explains how America, Christianity and liberty all are being destroyed by the Trojan horse of globalism.

View original post here:
Obama-era rules jeopardize California farming - WND.com